If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Originally Posted by SandVillageShinobi

It may be hard to believe but maybe nothing created the universe. Maybe it just is. Maybe the universe is just there because it is. We will never know how, or if it even was, it was created. I doubt that we're even meant to know these things. I don't even believe that we were even meant to step foot on the moon. If we were meant to step foot off the earth and on the moon, or anywhere else, it would be able to sustain life. My point is if we were meant to know/ do these things we would know/do them, and I know we DID step on the moon but we couldn't be there for long because the moon cannot and never will sustain life.

I happen to find you calling my beliefs a fantasy story offensive. You don't hear me calling christianity(or any religion for that matter) a fantasy story. I may not believe in those things but I try not shut other people down for them. You can say you don't believe in it and your reasons behind it, but please do not say anything against it.

You do realize Christianity's been persecuted for a couple thousand years, while evolution less than 200. If anyone's known or knows persecution, it'd be the Christians. However, I do see where you're coming from saying we shouldn't judge. I also agree that if I don't believe the same thing as someone else, I'm not going to bash them or hate them for their beliefs.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

I find incredibly strange that a lot of theists decide that science is invalid only when it crosses over their beliefs. Somehow you think they managed to get gravity, electromagnetism, electronics and so many other innovations right, but when it comes to the things your bible tells you, it must be wrong. There is pretty much no evidence that you would accept as good enough.

If evolution had as many holes as you make it out to have, it would have been rejected by the scientific community ages ago. Unlike religion, science constantly modifies itself, adding new theories and updating old ones. This all relies on a system of proof. There seems to be this growing trend (most likely not a recent thing) with the fundamentalists that feel that science is encroaching upon religious grounds, so they feel they must defend their beliefs and try to counter attack science. The thing with science and scientists, is they don't care about religion in the sense they are trying to disprove it. All they are doing is searching for facts and trying to explain them with logical arguments and substantiated proof. If it happens to disprove something religion says, so be it. Evolution is practically proven at this stage and the only real option you have (at least if you have a logical, open mind) is to incorporate this into your beliefs. The problem with it however, is that it happens over such a long time, it is hard to be noticed by us.

I pose this idea to you. What if god's plan was initially to make humans, but he used the process of evolution to do it. Surely such an omnipotent being would find such a task simple. What if his "design" was for a further more complete human down the line that we are just a stepping stone to. What if god just likes to see life change instead of just remaining stagnant. What makes us so much better than animals? Our intelligence? We're just lucky we managed to develop it first, otherwise we would have been wiped out. In my mind we are no different than animals.

I don't believe in a god, but it just seems disappointing to me when religious people clash with science. The two are fundamentally separate, it is possible to practice both. However, unlike religion, science must be accepted as a whole as it is all based on physical evidence.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Originally Posted by Germanicus

If I may; the adaptation you're addressing is known as descent with modification, which supports the theory of natural selection that was a main staple of Darwin's theory. Adaptations such as that are a response to environmental stimuli, which made those traits best suited to the conditions around them.

And whether or not you're Christian makes almost no difference whatsoever. If God did indeed create life, why is it so important that he specifically made man as man? Why not make man through a prolonged, practiced experiment in which he acquires the best traits for his individual sector by living through the conditions that surround them...say, through evolution.

A very interesting question and good points are raised. It's people like this we need more, whether an individual is christian, muslim, jewish, atheist, or anything else for that matter.

Anyway, getting to the point, I wouldn't be able to say why God created Adam as a man and not through millions of years through evolution. I don't know why God in the bible created life as we know it without the use of evolution. Maybe because death didn't exist before Adam and Eve's sin and fall from perfection. Logically, it raises the point by, most commonly, atheists who say why the descendants of Adam and Eve also require forgiveness and are just as guilty as Adam and Eve. It's a good and fair question to ask. Now, I don't claim to know everything, but here's what I do think. Since Adam and Eve sinned, their perfect bodies "fell" from perfection and became imperfect. As we know from the study of genetics, Adam and Eve's children inhereited that "imperfection" and that, if correct, explains why everyone needs forgiveness for that original sin. It's not something we did, but rather what we inherited because of Adam and Eve's imperfection and fall because we all have Adam and Eve's DNA, albeit just rearranged into a different order.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

1. We did not evolve from monkeys.
2. We shared a common ancestor many years millions of years ago. We could call them Old Kingdom Monkeys.
3. From these Old Kingdom Monkeys derived many species of monkeys i.e. Orangutan and Gorillas.
4. Eventually we get apes, which is closer to us in the evolution chart.
5. We then are closer when we shared a common ancestor with Neanderthals, however they died off because of Natural Selection.

This leads me onto my next point.
Natural Selection. THIS IS A THEORY OF EVOLUTION. The genius who came up with this was called Charles Darwin.
In short, natural selection means survival of the fittest. So, say for instance, a beetle baby was born with a random mutation.
This random mutation helped this baby beetle to survive more easily (high survival chance against environment/predators/etc), so we could say maybe this random mutation was a harder shell. This beetle with a harder shell reproduces with another beetle, and some of its offspring will have inherited this, more children will be born with this 'mutation' the father or mother had depending if it is a recessive or dominant allele.

Right, so there are more beetles with hard shells. Suddenly the cat population increases, and they get sharper claws (by their own natural selection). The beetles with softer shells get hurt a lot more easily, as these sharper claws can kill them. They will all eventually die off. The beetles with hard shells survive. Thus Natural Selection has taken place and the beetle has evolved.

Get it? We have stopped evolving almost because we are keeping the unfit/sick/disabled/unintelligent alive, which is not survival of the fittest. The random mutation causing our brain to have a conscience and morality was a gift or a curse? ( I think gift..)

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Originally Posted by Yusuke Urameshi

You do realize Christianity's been persecuted for a couple thousand years, while evolution less than 200. If anyone's known or knows persecution, it'd be the Christians. However, I do see where you're coming from saying we shouldn't judge. I also agree that if I don't believe the same thing as someone else, I'm not going to bash them or hate them for their beliefs.

Thank you sir, that is exactly what I was saying. I don't care what others believe in even if it may be different than mine, but I won't insult someone else's religion.(:

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Regardless of what genes we "share" with primates, the genetic information expresses itself in completely different ways. Did you know humans and bananas share about 50% similar genes? Meaningless.

It's how the information contained in the genes is expressed that counts, not the similarities in makeup. I like to use the example: GODISNOWHERE. That might say GOD IS NOW HERE or GOD IS NOWHERE. One hundred percent similar letters (makeup). Completely opposite meaning (expression). So the number of genes, pseudo or not, that we share with chimps or bananas is meaningless. Genes just happen to be the carriers of information.

How that information is interpreted and expressed is what's important, and evolution has no explanation for either the source of the information in the genes, nor for its origin, nor for the complex mode of transmission and its expression in various phenotypes. You can't explain any of it by random, mindless processes.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Regardless of what genes we "share" with primates, the genetic information expresses itself in completely different ways. Did you know humans and bananas share about 50% similar genes? Meaningless.

It's how the information contained in the genes is expressed that counts, not the similarities in makeup. I like to use the example: GODISNOWHERE. That might say GOD IS NOW HERE or GOD IS NOWHERE. One hundred percent similar letters (makeup). Completely opposite meaning (expression). So the number of genes, pseudo or not, that we share with chimps or bananas is meaningless. Genes just happen to be the carriers of information.

How that information is interpreted and expressed is what's important, and evolution has no explanation for either the source of the information in the genes, nor for its origin, nor for the complex mode of transmission and its expression in various phenotypes. You can't explain any of it by random, mindless processes.

Orrrr, you're denying the chance to broaden your horizon...apparently both upon language and science. Nothing is "meaningless"; everything in life has a purpose, and it would be better appreciated, if people like you didn't attempt to lower the value on some of life's beautiful little mysteries.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

1. We did not evolve from monkeys.
2. We shared a common ancestor many years millions of years ago. We could call them Old Kingdom Monkeys.
3. From these Old Kingdom Monkeys derived many species of monkeys i.e. Orangutan and Gorillas.
4. Eventually we get apes, which is closer to us in the evolution chart.
5. We then are closer when we shared a common ancestor with Neanderthals, however they died off because of Natural Selection.

This leads me onto my next point.
Natural Selection. THIS IS A THEORY OF EVOLUTION. The genius who came up with this was called Charles Darwin.
In short, natural selection means survival of the fittest. So, say for instance, a beetle baby was born with a random mutation.
This random mutation helped this baby beetle to survive more easily (high survival chance against environment/predators/etc), so we could say maybe this random mutation was a harder shell. This beetle with a harder shell reproduces with another beetle, and some of its offspring will have inherited this, more children will be born with this 'mutation' the father or mother had depending if it is a recessive or dominant allele.

Right, so there are more beetles with hard shells. Suddenly the cat population increases, and they get sharper claws (by their own natural selection). The beetles with softer shells get hurt a lot more easily, as these sharper claws can kill them. They will all eventually die off. The beetles with hard shells survive. Thus Natural Selection has taken place and the beetle has evolved.

Get it? We have stopped evolving almost because we are keeping the unfit/sick/disabled/unintelligent alive, which is not survival of the fittest. The random mutation causing our brain to have a conscience and morality was a gift or a curse? ( I think gift..)

How would you explain disease, such as diabetes, which is hereditary? Yes, we have medicine 'stopping' natural selection. Regardless, the person with diabetes would mate and have another baby with diabetes and so on and so forth. Diabetes can hardly be called a gift, but rather a result of sin, which makes everything in this world deteriorate instead of get better.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Originally Posted by Germanicus

Orrrr, you're denying the chance to broaden your horizon...apparently both upon language and science. Nothing is "meaningless"; everything in life has a purpose, and it would be better appreciated, if people like you didn't attempt to lower the value on some of life's beautiful little mysteries.

I like how evolutionists always have to come up with a reason or purpose for things and why they do what they do. If their religion is true, there really IS no purpose or design in anything. Richard Dawkins, the well-known atheist evolutionist wannabe philosopher, even admits things have an "appearance of design" but then dogmatically insists they were not designed. Brilliant, eh? How does something have the "appearance" of design with no design involved? Genius. you have to be REALLY SMART to believe in evolution. Or at least you have to think you are.

Keep being strong. You're on the winning side! Evolution is destined for the scientific trash bins of history.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Originally Posted by hokutoshinken

I like how evolutionists always have to come up with a reason or purpose for things and why they do what they do. If their religion is true, there really IS no purpose or design in anything. Richard Dawkins, the well-known atheist evolutionist wannabe philosopher, even admits things have an "appearance of design" but then dogmatically insists they were not designed. Brilliant, eh? How does something have the "appearance" of design with no design involved? Genius. you have to be REALLY SMART to believe in evolution. Or at least you have to think you are.

Keep being strong. You're on the winning side! Evolution is destined for the scientific trash bins of history.

Do you even realize what you're saying? Evolution is not a religion! Wake up dude, this is real life! Things need reasons to be true! Especially scientific research which has had years of agonizing testing and perfecting. All Creationism has is a book which was changed, censored, and distorted by bigots who used the content they wanted for the purposes they wanted, on so many occasions that the Bible practically doesn't even have one uniform rendition. Evolution has been prodded, molded, and supported with actual research and testing. Creationism was by nature manipulative and deceitful, has no proven factual evidence, whether historical scientific or otherwise, and is therefore not sufficient to be called a proper basis for the foundation of life! That's really it now; if y'all truly can't believe that there's more out there than a magical creation of man, I truly have very little hope that this generation can accomplish anything meaningful.

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Originally Posted by Germanicus

Do you even realize what you're saying? Evolution is not a religion! Wake up dude, this is real life! Things need reasons to be true! Especially scientific research which has had years of agonizing testing and perfecting. All Creationism has is a book which was changed, censored, and distorted by bigots who used the content they wanted for the purposes they wanted, on so many occasions that the Bible practically doesn't even have one uniform rendition. Evolution has been prodded, molded, and supported with actual research and testing. Creationism was by nature manipulative and deceitful, has no proven factual evidence, whether historical scientific or otherwise, and is therefore not sufficient to be called a proper basis for the foundation of life! That's really it now; if y'all truly can't believe that there's more out there than a magical creation of man, I truly have very little hope that this generation can accomplish anything meaningful.

The fact that evolution has to modify itself and its theories proves that it is an unstable 'religion'. It has to modify itself so that it won't collapse. The Bible, on the other hand, was written in a span of 1500 years and hasn't changed what it says. Even with new discoveries and new technology, the Bible is yet to be proven false.

Am I the only one that thinks that a book, written over 1500 years by over 40 people, that doesn't contradict itself once is anything but supernatural or inspired?

Re: Evolution. Were we really envolve from monkeys?

Regardless of what genes we "share" with primates, the genetic information expresses itself in completely different ways. Did you know humans and bananas share about 50% similar genes? Meaningless.

It's how the information contained in the genes is expressed that counts, not the similarities in makeup. I like to use the example: GODISNOWHERE. That might say GOD IS NOW HERE or GOD IS NOWHERE. One hundred percent similar letters (makeup). Completely opposite meaning (expression). So the number of genes, pseudo or not, that we share with chimps or bananas is meaningless. Genes just happen to be the carriers of information.

How that information is interpreted and expressed is what's important, and evolution has no explanation for either the source of the information in the genes, nor for its origin, nor for the complex mode of transmission and its expression in various phenotypes. You can't explain any of it by random, mindless processes.

Hey there, I used to be a Young Earth Creationist and I know how you feel. Could you tell me what you think about this video?

Originally Posted by Yusuke Urameshi

How would you explain disease, such as diabetes, which is hereditary? Yes, we have medicine 'stopping' natural selection. Regardless, the person with diabetes would mate and have another baby with diabetes and so on and so forth. Diabetes can hardly be called a gift, but rather a result of sin, which makes everything in this world deteriorate instead of get better.

Actually that fit's nicely in to the model of Evolution we have — it's actually well known in evolutionary biology that +90% of genetic mutations with a species genetic code are negative to the life of that animal.

I like how evolutionists always have to come up with a reason or purpose for things and why they do what they do. If their religion is true, there really IS no purpose or design in anything. Richard Dawkins, the well-known atheist evolutionist wannabe philosopher, even admits things have an "appearance of design" but then dogmatically insists they were not designed. Brilliant, eh? How does something have the "appearance" of design with no design involved? Genius. you have to be REALLY SMART to believe in evolution. Or at least you have to think you are.

Keep being strong. You're on the winning side! Evolution is destined for the scientific trash bins of history.

First and for most, your making wide sweeping assumptions about every person who understands and accepts evolutionary theory. That's fallacious and not convincing. Do you appreciate it when others make sweeping statements about theists that don't apply to you? No, of corse you don't. So please, just stop.

I use to be a Fundamentalist Christian then decided to take on the mantle of Atheist for many years till finally only a few years ago I discovered that I was a Pantheist. On top of being a Pantheist I also understand and accept the theory of evolution —

Do you have any questions on how I could be both a 'theist' and some one who accepts evolutionary theory?